I'm gonna be staffing the US DoT desk at FEMA R3 for the next week or so. If you're tasked, don't do anything aggressively stupid. If you're not tasked, stay home. There's enough to do without having to pull a self deployed "asset" out of a pickle.

I'm gonna be staffing the US DoT desk at FEMA R3 for the next week or so. If you're tasked, don't do anything aggressively stupid. If you're not tasked, stay home. There's enough to do without having to pull a self deployed "asset" out of a pickle.

Keep on, keepin' on....

Yes, the situation is unfortunate... I am certainly not happy that the hurricane is going to hit. I hope there aren't members out there who are excited for the impending storm, just so they get to "see some action"or whatever. I 100% agree with your statement.

That being said, I am glad that given the events that we (CAP as an organization) are able to lend a hand and support the relief efforts, should we be needed.

I hope there aren't members out there who are excited for the impending storm, just so they get to "see some action"or whatever.

You'll always have a few people who are psyched over an impeding disaster. It gives validation to the organization, and gives an individual purpose. It's kind of like sitting around waiting for the big fight to happen, and when it doesn't, you get bored. You don't want anyone to get hurt, but you want the action.

That said, CAP's biggest missions come from persons facing death, or at least severe injury. I hope that nobody's action comes at the cost of someone's life, anyone's.

Training for this stuff can be exciting, and it can give you a taste to want the real deal. Even when responding to the real thing, you may have a taste for it. It's adrenaline. This is what you're trained to do. But there's a whole aftermath that comes with it that people don't really think about until it hits you in the face.

There was palpable disappointment on the various news outlets when it became obvious it would make landfall as "less then a major storm" (ultimately a CAT 2) while under-breath wishing about "it gaining strength before landfall".

90Mph winds and 8 months of rain is nothing to trifle with, but news outlets already trying to spin it beyond what it is.

There was palpable disappointment on the various news outlets when it became obvious it would make landfall as "less then a major storm" (ultimately a CAT 2) while under-breath wishing about "it gaining strength before landfall".

90Mph winds and 8 months of rain is nothing to trifle with, but news outlets already trying to spin it beyond what it is.

There was palpable disappointment on the various news outlets when it became obvious it would make landfall as "less then a major storm" (ultimately a CAT 2) while under-breath wishing about "it gaining strength before landfall".

90Mph winds and 8 months of rain is nothing to trifle with, but news outlets already trying to spin it beyond what it is.

People in the affected areas seem to get complacent about these storms, and the news folks are trying to get these people thinking seriously about what's really in store for them.I'm unsure of your specific experience with hurricanes/tropical storms, but I have been involved in two - Donna in 1960, and Camille in 1969. The coverage you see on The Weather Channel only give a hint of what's happening on site.

There was palpable disappointment on the various news outlets when it became obvious it would make landfall as "less then a major storm" (ultimately a CAT 2) while under-breath wishing about "it gaining strength before landfall".

90Mph winds and 8 months of rain is nothing to trifle with, but news outlets already trying to spin it beyond what it is.

People in the affected areas seem to get complacent about these storms, and the news folks are trying to get these people thinking seriously about what's really in store for them.I'm unsure of your specific experience with hurricanes/tropical storms, but I have been involved in two - Donna in 1960, and Camille in 1969. The coverage you see on The Weather Channel only give a hint of what's happening on site.

It hearkens back to the basic principles of yellow journalism and marketing their product. If it bleeds it leads was the old saying. Without Xtreme Weather! Then they have less of an exciting product as a specialty Channel.

Plus, it fits with certain political agendas of different stripes. They get disappointed if they can't point to increasingly horrible weather as justification for their points of view and for scoring points against whomever the opposition is.

There was palpable disappointment on the various news outlets when it became obvious it would make landfall as "less then a major storm" (ultimately a CAT 2) while under-breath wishing about "it gaining strength before landfall".

90Mph winds and 8 months of rain is nothing to trifle with, but news outlets already trying to spin it beyond what it is.

People in the affected areas seem to get complacent about these storms, and the news folks are trying to get these people thinking seriously about what's really in store for them.I'm unsure of your specific experience with hurricanes/tropical storms, but I have been involved in two - Donna in 1960, and Camille in 1969. The coverage you see on The Weather Channel only give a hint of what's happening on site.

I had a micro-burst come down almost directly on the house last July, that lasted about 1 minute, and was terrifying enough - I can't imagine what it must be like for that to be sustained for hours to days.

My point was that reality is plenty scary enough without wishing it was worse, etc., but these daysit's all about the clicks, so there you are.

Then again, 7 years ago we're watching the Weather Channel and Jim Cantore is live in a boat going down a street in West Pittston, PA narrating the flood damage, and his cameraman pans over to my buddy's house and the water is halfway up the front windows... Not fake news there.